The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals backed opponents of marriage equality this week when it ruled in favor of magistrates who refuse to perform same-sex marriages.

Three couples filed suit, claiming they were harmed by SB2, a 2015 law which, in their belief, uses public funds to allow clerks to recuse themselves from giving marriage licenses to gay couples. But a three-judge panel voted unanimously to dismiss their claim, insisting the couples had no standing to sue, because two of them were already married and the law didn't significantly impede their ability to wed.

"The outcome here is in no way a comment on same-sex marriage as a matter of social policy," Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote in the decision. "The case before us is far more technical, whether plaintiffs, simply by virtue of their status as state taxpayers, have alleged a personal, particularized injury for the purposes of [federal court] standing."

SB2 was passed by lawmakers overriding a veto from Governor Pat McCrory. It allows magistrates and employees of the register of deeds office to recuse themselves from performing marriages "based on any sincerely held religious objections." Those who file such a notice cannot officiate any unions, gay or straight, for at least six months. In McDowell County, all the magistrates have recused themselves , requiring the state to pay for a clerk from Rutherford County to travel several days a week to perform their duties.

They maintain the state cannot require taxpayers to pay for that clerk's travel and expenses, But Wilkinson described it as simply "some token amount of funds." His decision backs a ruling last year, in which a federal judge ruled they hadn't shown either direct harm, or that they standing in the case.

The plaintiffs include two lesbian couples, as well as a heterosexual couple that won a 1978 case against North Carolina magistrates who refused to perform their interracial marriage on religious grounds.

After this week's ruling, the couples are considering whether to seek a hearing before the full circuit court or to take their case to the Supreme Court.

“SB2 is unjust and distorts the true meaning of religious freedom," said Rev. Jasmine Beach-Ferrara of The Campaign for Southern Equality, which is representing the couples.

"From Day One, it’s been clear that SB2 is about one thing: finding a new way to discriminate against same-sex couples and privileging one set of religious beliefs over others. We will keep standing up to discrimination until LGBTQ North Carolinians are equal in every sphere of life.”

"Once again, a federal court has rejected the idea that exercising one's First Amendment religious freedoms somehow infringes on others' rights," declared state Senate leader Phil Berger, who authored SB2.

While the individuals in this case were able to find other magistrates, others may not be so lucky—forcing them to incur travel expenses of their own, as well as miss work and face other hardships, simply to exercise their constitutional rights.

In addition, SB2 opens the door for magistrates to refuse marriage licenses to interfaiths couple or to a divorced person, both of which are forbidden by several faiths.

Utah and Mississippi already have "marriage recusal" law on the books and, in April, the Texas Senate approved one one for the Lone Star State. Their solution: Letting county courts hire random people to issue licenses over the phone.